Eight takeaways from US legalising gay marriage and why it's historic
The US Supreme Court legalised nationwide gay marriage on June 26 in a landmark judgement that was long expected, yet was celebrated with fresh cheer and serendipitous enthusiasm by an embattled community. Here are the details:
1. The ruling was delivered 5-4 with the Republican jurist Anthony Kennedy, voting in favour of gay marriage.
2. Justice Kennedy, who also wrote the majority opinion, closed the judgement with this sublime paragraph, drafting it as a legal safeguard of the constitutional rights of gay men and women:
 |
3. This is by far the most far-reaching ruling in the history of gay rights cases in America, or anywhere else in the world for that matter. It marks a complete shift on the debate over gay equality by ruling into law the right of gay men and women to marry same-sex partners anywhere in the United States.
 |
| Americans cheering and waving the rainbow after the landmark SCOTUS judgment. |
4. The case came up after the Supreme Court decided to take a call on gay marriage following the judgement of the Sixth Circuit US Court of Appeals that held that the Constitution does not require states to allow marriage of same-sex couples.
5. The case before the Supreme Court sought to answer two questions: Whether states were legally bound to solemnise same-sex weddings, and whether they were required to recognise same-sex weddings solemnised in another state.
 |
| #LoveWins trended all day in America and soon after the verdict was the top trend all over the world. |
6. The judgement reflects changing opinions on same sex marriage in the United States. In August 2010, CNN released the first national poll showing majority support for same-sex marriage. The poll found that 52 per cent of Americans supported marriage equality, dramatically up from the 1996 figure of 27 per cent.
7. In the aftermath of Ireland voting in favour of gay marriage last month, the debate over whether essential rights should be decided via popular vote or the legal route had assumed urgency. Whether rights should be pinned down to majority opinion was the issue at stake here.
8. In this regard, the SCOTUS ruling is instructive because it has shown the legislative route to correcting a historical wrong, something that should nudge jurors back home to take up the issue of gay rights suo motu and reverse the despicable 2013 SC ruling that reinstated anti-gay provisions of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code.